<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_19_0227249</id>
	<title>Opera Unite Web Server Benchmarked</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1245422400000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>worb writes <i>"<a href="http://unite.opera.com/">Opera Unite</a> comes with a web server which is supposedly going to 'redefine the web.' But how well does it actually perform? Is it a threat to other server solutions? Someone <a href="http://unitehowto.com/Performance">put it to the test, and published the results</a>. While nginx, one of the fastest web servers available, is 5 times faster, a PHP+Apache+MySQL server is only 2 times as fast. A compiled C++ server, the MadFish WebToolkit, is 6 times faster. He concludes that Opera Unite's server is impressive, and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>worb writes " Opera Unite comes with a web server which is supposedly going to 'redefine the web .
' But how well does it actually perform ?
Is it a threat to other server solutions ?
Someone put it to the test , and published the results .
While nginx , one of the fastest web servers available , is 5 times faster , a PHP + Apache + MySQL server is only 2 times as fast .
A compiled C + + server , the MadFish WebToolkit , is 6 times faster .
He concludes that Opera Unite 's server is impressive , and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>worb writes "Opera Unite comes with a web server which is supposedly going to 'redefine the web.
' But how well does it actually perform?
Is it a threat to other server solutions?
Someone put it to the test, and published the results.
While nginx, one of the fastest web servers available, is 5 times faster, a PHP+Apache+MySQL server is only 2 times as fast.
A compiled C++ server, the MadFish WebToolkit, is 6 times faster.
He concludes that Opera Unite's server is impressive, and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390111</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1245426900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One word explanation: Vikings.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One word explanation : Vikings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One word explanation: Vikings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385981</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385139</id>
	<title>Re:Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>rs79</author>
	<datestamp>1245344220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> <b>"So what? It's a somewhat slow web server. It's easy, guys. If you want to leave your home machine naked to the net, use real and tested server software. If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier, get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page."</b></i> </p><p>I'm guessing you haven't actually tried the software. But you know about problems with it already even though it isn't actually a "webserver/daemon" in the classic sense of the word.</p><p>That's kinda like saying "I don't like asparagus but I've never tried it because I don't like it".</p><p>Maybe it does have a security hole in it. But shouldn't we actually find out first before we just guess and assume that it does?</p><p>Security hole. Pffft. BindOutlookXPIEExcel. Life goes on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" So what ?
It 's a somewhat slow web server .
It 's easy , guys .
If you want to leave your home machine naked to the net , use real and tested server software .
If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier , get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page .
" I 'm guessing you have n't actually tried the software .
But you know about problems with it already even though it is n't actually a " webserver/daemon " in the classic sense of the word.That 's kinda like saying " I do n't like asparagus but I 've never tried it because I do n't like it " .Maybe it does have a security hole in it .
But should n't we actually find out first before we just guess and assume that it does ? Security hole .
Pffft. BindOutlookXPIEExcel .
Life goes on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "So what?
It's a somewhat slow web server.
It's easy, guys.
If you want to leave your home machine naked to the net, use real and tested server software.
If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier, get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page.
" I'm guessing you haven't actually tried the software.
But you know about problems with it already even though it isn't actually a "webserver/daemon" in the classic sense of the word.That's kinda like saying "I don't like asparagus but I've never tried it because I don't like it".Maybe it does have a security hole in it.
But shouldn't we actually find out first before we just guess and assume that it does?Security hole.
Pffft. BindOutlookXPIEExcel.
Life goes on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387625</id>
	<title>Re:It's a toy...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1245414420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly.  It's like someone noticed you can edit text in Opera and posted an article asking if it's really a threat to Vim.  Just because two pieces of software have some overlapping functionality doesn't mean that they are meant for the same task.  You wouldn't use MS Word as a code editor, even though it can edit text, and you wouldn't use Opera Unite to host a high-volume site, even though it can serve HTTP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
It 's like someone noticed you can edit text in Opera and posted an article asking if it 's really a threat to Vim .
Just because two pieces of software have some overlapping functionality does n't mean that they are meant for the same task .
You would n't use MS Word as a code editor , even though it can edit text , and you would n't use Opera Unite to host a high-volume site , even though it can serve HTTP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
It's like someone noticed you can edit text in Opera and posted an article asking if it's really a threat to Vim.
Just because two pieces of software have some overlapping functionality doesn't mean that they are meant for the same task.
You wouldn't use MS Word as a code editor, even though it can edit text, and you wouldn't use Opera Unite to host a high-volume site, even though it can serve HTTP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384779</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387729</id>
	<title>Can someone else honestly tag this...</title>
	<author>sega01</author>
	<datestamp>1245415440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>as worstofslashdot? This article is only mildly interesting because I had never heard of Opera Unite before. But what is with such a low quality article getting on Slashdot? Slashdot is for people with half a brain. I don't care about "813 r/s"; saying that figure means nothing. And what hardware exactly? Reminds me of <a href="http://archive.netbsd.se/?ml=linux-reiserfs-devel&amp;a=2008-07&amp;t=8033901" title="netbsd.se" rel="nofollow">this post</a> [netbsd.se] on reiserfs-devel (just the first two posts). At least he gives some comparisions later on, but a Slashdot article pointing to a witty comment in another article would probably make for a better read.

Seriously though, what is happening to Slashdot? Digg sometimes is more consistent with good articles, and that is just sad. Slashdot is a great site overall and has its own unique taste, but it needs to stop pushing articles like this.

Cheers!

Yeah, I debated posting this as anonymous. Troll me down if you disagree.</htmltext>
<tokenext>as worstofslashdot ?
This article is only mildly interesting because I had never heard of Opera Unite before .
But what is with such a low quality article getting on Slashdot ?
Slashdot is for people with half a brain .
I do n't care about " 813 r/s " ; saying that figure means nothing .
And what hardware exactly ?
Reminds me of this post [ netbsd.se ] on reiserfs-devel ( just the first two posts ) .
At least he gives some comparisions later on , but a Slashdot article pointing to a witty comment in another article would probably make for a better read .
Seriously though , what is happening to Slashdot ?
Digg sometimes is more consistent with good articles , and that is just sad .
Slashdot is a great site overall and has its own unique taste , but it needs to stop pushing articles like this .
Cheers ! Yeah , I debated posting this as anonymous .
Troll me down if you disagree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as worstofslashdot?
This article is only mildly interesting because I had never heard of Opera Unite before.
But what is with such a low quality article getting on Slashdot?
Slashdot is for people with half a brain.
I don't care about "813 r/s"; saying that figure means nothing.
And what hardware exactly?
Reminds me of this post [netbsd.se] on reiserfs-devel (just the first two posts).
At least he gives some comparisions later on, but a Slashdot article pointing to a witty comment in another article would probably make for a better read.
Seriously though, what is happening to Slashdot?
Digg sometimes is more consistent with good articles, and that is just sad.
Slashdot is a great site overall and has its own unique taste, but it needs to stop pushing articles like this.
Cheers!

Yeah, I debated posting this as anonymous.
Troll me down if you disagree.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386839</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading, again</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1245405120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll say it when there will be one.<br>
It is not very hard to serve files in a secure fashion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll say it when there will be one .
It is not very hard to serve files in a secure fashion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll say it when there will be one.
It is not very hard to serve files in a secure fashion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385475</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>nausea\_malvarma</author>
	<datestamp>1245348000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't know of this requirement when I posted my comment. Does anyone know of a similar application that makes running a temporary web server idiot-proof, that doesn't require special accounts?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't know of this requirement when I posted my comment .
Does anyone know of a similar application that makes running a temporary web server idiot-proof , that does n't require special accounts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't know of this requirement when I posted my comment.
Does anyone know of a similar application that makes running a temporary web server idiot-proof, that doesn't require special accounts?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384945</id>
	<title>Re:Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245341520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It sure is attracting a lot of attention for such an "epic fail"...</htmltext>
<tokenext>It sure is attracting a lot of attention for such an " epic fail " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sure is attracting a lot of attention for such an "epic fail"...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386265</id>
	<title>Re:I feel vindicated to some extent</title>
	<author>twostix</author>
	<datestamp>1245441960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a dozen free simple "point and click" web servers already in existence.  IIS has a "point and click" interface *and* comes installed in most Windows installations and still holds a minority share.</p><p>I don't think you understand why Apache is where it is. And it's *hardly* because there's no competition for it.   It's fought web servers backed by billion dollar companies to come out on top.  There's a reason for that and it's not just because it's free as there's other free web servers that also hold a tiny fraction of the market.</p><p>To do anything other than host a simple html site requires complexity. Some thing's can't be made any simpler than they are with trading off far too much flexibility.</p><p>If all you need to do is host a simple static website on your PC that has a static IP, then use the right tool for the job.  Trying to make Apache something it's not just so that it's easy to do one thing to make 0.01\% of the market happy is ridiculous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a dozen free simple " point and click " web servers already in existence .
IIS has a " point and click " interface * and * comes installed in most Windows installations and still holds a minority share.I do n't think you understand why Apache is where it is .
And it 's * hardly * because there 's no competition for it .
It 's fought web servers backed by billion dollar companies to come out on top .
There 's a reason for that and it 's not just because it 's free as there 's other free web servers that also hold a tiny fraction of the market.To do anything other than host a simple html site requires complexity .
Some thing 's ca n't be made any simpler than they are with trading off far too much flexibility.If all you need to do is host a simple static website on your PC that has a static IP , then use the right tool for the job .
Trying to make Apache something it 's not just so that it 's easy to do one thing to make 0.01 \ % of the market happy is ridiculous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a dozen free simple "point and click" web servers already in existence.
IIS has a "point and click" interface *and* comes installed in most Windows installations and still holds a minority share.I don't think you understand why Apache is where it is.
And it's *hardly* because there's no competition for it.
It's fought web servers backed by billion dollar companies to come out on top.
There's a reason for that and it's not just because it's free as there's other free web servers that also hold a tiny fraction of the market.To do anything other than host a simple html site requires complexity.
Some thing's can't be made any simpler than they are with trading off far too much flexibility.If all you need to do is host a simple static website on your PC that has a static IP, then use the right tool for the job.
Trying to make Apache something it's not just so that it's easy to do one thing to make 0.01\% of the market happy is ridiculous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386079</id>
	<title>Re:Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>TheMiddleRoad</author>
	<datestamp>1245353820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I feel dirty just thinking about that.  It reminds me of the days where entire hard drives were displayed on Napster.</p><p>And you're sure you want to do that?  First, it's possibly illegal.  Second, it's a security nightmare.  Third, you could set up a web server with an actual track record of security.</p><p>Ick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel dirty just thinking about that .
It reminds me of the days where entire hard drives were displayed on Napster.And you 're sure you want to do that ?
First , it 's possibly illegal .
Second , it 's a security nightmare .
Third , you could set up a web server with an actual track record of security.Ick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel dirty just thinking about that.
It reminds me of the days where entire hard drives were displayed on Napster.And you're sure you want to do that?
First, it's possibly illegal.
Second, it's a security nightmare.
Third, you could set up a web server with an actual track record of security.Ick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847</id>
	<title>Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245340860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So what?  It's a somewhat slow web server.  It's easy, guys.  If you want to leave your home machine naked to the net, use real and tested server software.  If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier, get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So what ?
It 's a somewhat slow web server .
It 's easy , guys .
If you want to leave your home machine naked to the net , use real and tested server software .
If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier , get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what?
It's a somewhat slow web server.
It's easy, guys.
If you want to leave your home machine naked to the net, use real and tested server software.
If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier, get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385561</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>squiggly12</author>
	<datestamp>1245348720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, right now I just checked how much memory that FF is using on my machine and it has consumed 384, 164 K of memory. Two tabs open.
<br>
I just did a fresh install of XP Pro on this machine 5 days ago.
<br>
Flamers go away, FF did much better when I was running Vista Ultimate memory-wise.

<i>One more beer then bed I promise!</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , right now I just checked how much memory that FF is using on my machine and it has consumed 384 , 164 K of memory .
Two tabs open .
I just did a fresh install of XP Pro on this machine 5 days ago .
Flamers go away , FF did much better when I was running Vista Ultimate memory-wise .
One more beer then bed I promise !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, right now I just checked how much memory that FF is using on my machine and it has consumed 384, 164 K of memory.
Two tabs open.
I just did a fresh install of XP Pro on this machine 5 days ago.
Flamers go away, FF did much better when I was running Vista Ultimate memory-wise.
One more beer then bed I promise!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386565</id>
	<title>Re:What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1245444600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The really stupid part is that they're speed-testing an alpha.  Who cares?  It's going to be different by release, anyway.  <p>Benchmarks and reviews are ways for otherwise boring people to attempt to take part in ideas larger than themselves.  Never mind if you're just jabbering or are an idiot with an obviously-flawed method - everybody's text looks the same on wordpress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The really stupid part is that they 're speed-testing an alpha .
Who cares ?
It 's going to be different by release , anyway .
Benchmarks and reviews are ways for otherwise boring people to attempt to take part in ideas larger than themselves .
Never mind if you 're just jabbering or are an idiot with an obviously-flawed method - everybody 's text looks the same on wordpress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The really stupid part is that they're speed-testing an alpha.
Who cares?
It's going to be different by release, anyway.
Benchmarks and reviews are ways for otherwise boring people to attempt to take part in ideas larger than themselves.
Never mind if you're just jabbering or are an idiot with an obviously-flawed method - everybody's text looks the same on wordpress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28392493</id>
	<title>Misleading and not useful at all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245437280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Benchmarking is difficult, Benchmarking is work, Benchmarking is tough, Benchmarks have to be done for a particular kind (sort) of applications. I think the ones mentioned here have different aims. At least a benchmark should be done by a technically skilled person. Regarding the goals of the given software packages I completly agree with the previous poster "Steel Realm"</p><p>citation:<br>"Since Opera uses only 1 proccess and therefore - only 1 core . . .  "<br>Oops . . . really wrong, at least the way it's written (what about these 13 threads?)</p><p>apache + php + mysql VS. unite + file I/O<br>Strange comparison - I let one program directly write to the local harddisk and the other one has to write to a database (however, I guess on the same machine)</p><p>13 concurrent connections == heavy load?<br>Nope - definetly not. However, I have to admit that 13 concurrent connections *can* result in heavy load. Normally this is not the case. As soon as you have a dedicated db server there is some additional latency (no matter how fast the network is), which makes the time/request longer. This doesn't mean the webserver has (really) more to do, it just means that some of these connections are waiting for results from the db machine. Webservers are desinged to handle much more concurrent connections (hundreds or thousands!)</p><p>citation:<br>"Opera Unite uses very smart file I/O! Even if you save data to file each request (simplest, but stupidest way to do it) - it still can push out very impressive 744 requests/second! (It probably means that this data is saved to memory and dumped only sometimes, smart move!)"<br>This smart move can become a major pain. What if you are writing some kind of logs and you are trying to figure out why your application crashed. Well let's have a look at the logs . . . hm . . . logging seems to have ended sometime before the interesting part would have started . .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. uhm . . . smart caching<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p><p>I think this benchmark is worthless. And yes - I hate this kind of benchmarks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Benchmarking is difficult , Benchmarking is work , Benchmarking is tough , Benchmarks have to be done for a particular kind ( sort ) of applications .
I think the ones mentioned here have different aims .
At least a benchmark should be done by a technically skilled person .
Regarding the goals of the given software packages I completly agree with the previous poster " Steel Realm " citation : " Since Opera uses only 1 proccess and therefore - only 1 core .
. .
" Oops .
. .
really wrong , at least the way it 's written ( what about these 13 threads ?
) apache + php + mysql VS. unite + file I/OStrange comparison - I let one program directly write to the local harddisk and the other one has to write to a database ( however , I guess on the same machine ) 13 concurrent connections = = heavy load ? Nope - definetly not .
However , I have to admit that 13 concurrent connections * can * result in heavy load .
Normally this is not the case .
As soon as you have a dedicated db server there is some additional latency ( no matter how fast the network is ) , which makes the time/request longer .
This does n't mean the webserver has ( really ) more to do , it just means that some of these connections are waiting for results from the db machine .
Webservers are desinged to handle much more concurrent connections ( hundreds or thousands !
) citation : " Opera Unite uses very smart file I/O !
Even if you save data to file each request ( simplest , but stupidest way to do it ) - it still can push out very impressive 744 requests/second !
( It probably means that this data is saved to memory and dumped only sometimes , smart move !
) " This smart move can become a major pain .
What if you are writing some kind of logs and you are trying to figure out why your application crashed .
Well let 's have a look at the logs .
. .
hm .
. .
logging seems to have ended sometime before the interesting part would have started .
. .. uhm .
. .
smart caching : ( I think this benchmark is worthless .
And yes - I hate this kind of benchmarks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Benchmarking is difficult, Benchmarking is work, Benchmarking is tough, Benchmarks have to be done for a particular kind (sort) of applications.
I think the ones mentioned here have different aims.
At least a benchmark should be done by a technically skilled person.
Regarding the goals of the given software packages I completly agree with the previous poster "Steel Realm"citation:"Since Opera uses only 1 proccess and therefore - only 1 core .
. .
"Oops .
. .
really wrong, at least the way it's written (what about these 13 threads?
)apache + php + mysql VS. unite + file I/OStrange comparison - I let one program directly write to the local harddisk and the other one has to write to a database (however, I guess on the same machine)13 concurrent connections == heavy load?Nope - definetly not.
However, I have to admit that 13 concurrent connections *can* result in heavy load.
Normally this is not the case.
As soon as you have a dedicated db server there is some additional latency (no matter how fast the network is), which makes the time/request longer.
This doesn't mean the webserver has (really) more to do, it just means that some of these connections are waiting for results from the db machine.
Webservers are desinged to handle much more concurrent connections (hundreds or thousands!
)citation:"Opera Unite uses very smart file I/O!
Even if you save data to file each request (simplest, but stupidest way to do it) - it still can push out very impressive 744 requests/second!
(It probably means that this data is saved to memory and dumped only sometimes, smart move!
)"This smart move can become a major pain.
What if you are writing some kind of logs and you are trying to figure out why your application crashed.
Well let's have a look at the logs .
. .
hm .
. .
logging seems to have ended sometime before the interesting part would have started .
. .. uhm .
. .
smart caching :(I think this benchmark is worthless.
And yes - I hate this kind of benchmarks</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385033</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245342540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uuhhhh....I really hate to rain on your parade and all, but you do know that Opera Unite will send everything <a href="http://infoworld.com/d/developer-world/opera-unite-real-plan-put-software-in-control-again-902?page=0,2" title="infoworld.com" rel="nofollow">through Opera's servers</a> [infoworld.com] right? </p><p> Allow me to quote you a snippet of the relevant text "Although Opera Unite claims to "directly link people's personal computers together," to use it you need an account on Opera's servers, and all of your exchanges pass through Opera's servers first."</p><p>So I'm afraid it doesn't work like you think it does. All it does is move the central hub from Facebook to Opera. Considering how low their marketshare is I really doubt everyone is going to switch browsers just so they can see Aunt Marsha's new vacation photos. And considering that Opera is the only main browser besides IE that is closed source and proprietary frankly nobody should be surprised.</p><p>

 I predict Opera will hang on for another year or two, thanks to their mobile division, but eventually that will be taken by Google or Apple or Mobile Mozilla and then they will be kaput. Damned shame, as during the IE5 period they really had a shot of gaining a chunk of the market, but they never really knew how to market Opera effectively.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uuhhhh....I really hate to rain on your parade and all , but you do know that Opera Unite will send everything through Opera 's servers [ infoworld.com ] right ?
Allow me to quote you a snippet of the relevant text " Although Opera Unite claims to " directly link people 's personal computers together , " to use it you need an account on Opera 's servers , and all of your exchanges pass through Opera 's servers first .
" So I 'm afraid it does n't work like you think it does .
All it does is move the central hub from Facebook to Opera .
Considering how low their marketshare is I really doubt everyone is going to switch browsers just so they can see Aunt Marsha 's new vacation photos .
And considering that Opera is the only main browser besides IE that is closed source and proprietary frankly nobody should be surprised .
I predict Opera will hang on for another year or two , thanks to their mobile division , but eventually that will be taken by Google or Apple or Mobile Mozilla and then they will be kaput .
Damned shame , as during the IE5 period they really had a shot of gaining a chunk of the market , but they never really knew how to market Opera effectively .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uuhhhh....I really hate to rain on your parade and all, but you do know that Opera Unite will send everything through Opera's servers [infoworld.com] right?
Allow me to quote you a snippet of the relevant text "Although Opera Unite claims to "directly link people's personal computers together," to use it you need an account on Opera's servers, and all of your exchanges pass through Opera's servers first.
"So I'm afraid it doesn't work like you think it does.
All it does is move the central hub from Facebook to Opera.
Considering how low their marketshare is I really doubt everyone is going to switch browsers just so they can see Aunt Marsha's new vacation photos.
And considering that Opera is the only main browser besides IE that is closed source and proprietary frankly nobody should be surprised.
I predict Opera will hang on for another year or two, thanks to their mobile division, but eventually that will be taken by Google or Apple or Mobile Mozilla and then they will be kaput.
Damned shame, as during the IE5 period they really had a shot of gaining a chunk of the market, but they never really knew how to market Opera effectively.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245341280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You realize it is still smaller download then Firefox and has a smaller memory footprint then all other browsers, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You realize it is still smaller download then Firefox and has a smaller memory footprint then all other browsers , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You realize it is still smaller download then Firefox and has a smaller memory footprint then all other browsers, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28400893</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245502800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Latest public Opera: <a href="ftp://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/win/1000b1/en/" title="opera.com">ftp://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/win/1000b1/en/</a> [opera.com] (5.5 MB for the classic installer, 6.7 MB for the MSI)

<p>Latest public Firefox: <a href="ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/3.5rc2/win32/en-US/" title="mozilla.org">ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/3.5rc2/win32/en-US/</a> [mozilla.org] (7.9 MB, a hefty 1.2 MB bigger than even Opera's bloated MSI, and 2.4 MB bigger than the classic installer)

</p><p>And you were saying again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Latest public Opera : ftp : //ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/win/1000b1/en/ [ opera.com ] ( 5.5 MB for the classic installer , 6.7 MB for the MSI ) Latest public Firefox : ftp : //ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/3.5rc2/win32/en-US/ [ mozilla.org ] ( 7.9 MB , a hefty 1.2 MB bigger than even Opera 's bloated MSI , and 2.4 MB bigger than the classic installer ) And you were saying again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Latest public Opera: ftp://ftp.opera.com/pub/opera/win/1000b1/en/ [opera.com] (5.5 MB for the classic installer, 6.7 MB for the MSI)

Latest public Firefox: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/3.5rc2/win32/en-US/ [mozilla.org] (7.9 MB, a hefty 1.2 MB bigger than even Opera's bloated MSI, and 2.4 MB bigger than the classic installer)

And you were saying again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386063</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading, again</title>
	<author>master5o1</author>
	<datestamp>1245353640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Three levels of privacy, default being number two.<br>
<br>
1. Public, anyone can access.<br>
2. Passworded, give them the link, they can access, they give that link to someone else, so can they.<br>
3. Private.  Only the Opera Account holder can access.<br>
<br>
Also, it is only accessible while someone has Opera open. One can start and stop each unite service individually also.<br>
<br>
Sounds like it has some decent basic security to me<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Three levels of privacy , default being number two .
1. Public , anyone can access .
2. Passworded , give them the link , they can access , they give that link to someone else , so can they .
3. Private .
Only the Opera Account holder can access .
Also , it is only accessible while someone has Opera open .
One can start and stop each unite service individually also .
Sounds like it has some decent basic security to me : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Three levels of privacy, default being number two.
1. Public, anyone can access.
2. Passworded, give them the link, they can access, they give that link to someone else, so can they.
3. Private.
Only the Opera Account holder can access.
Also, it is only accessible while someone has Opera open.
One can start and stop each unite service individually also.
Sounds like it has some decent basic security to me :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386367</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>Mishotaki</author>
	<datestamp>1245442800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Opera Unite is a 40\% larger download than Firefox.</p></div><p>and how big is Firefox if you count all the extensions it needs to get as good as Opera?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera Unite is a 40 \ % larger download than Firefox.and how big is Firefox if you count all the extensions it needs to get as good as Opera ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera Unite is a 40\% larger download than Firefox.and how big is Firefox if you count all the extensions it needs to get as good as Opera?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386461</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>worb</author>
	<datestamp>1245443640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A more thoughtful take on the subject can be found here:</p></div></blockquote><p>
I'm surprised to see that people are still linking to this. It's basically full of errors, and was <a href="http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/show.dml/3725574#comment8860050" title="opera.com">written in rage</a> [opera.com] over all the hype Unite was getting. He was angry about how people just repeated Opera's claims blindly. Kind of like you are blindly referring to his blog post even though it turns out that the post is too inaccurate to really be used for anything.

</p><p>You really should read some of the comments on the page you are linking to, in order to see people correcting all the misconceptions. For example the misconception that everything goes through a proxy, as you claim it does.



Furthermore Chris's comments where fun until Haavard took him down a notch on his own blog, resulting in Chris himself posting on Haavard's blog with a massively different tone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A more thoughtful take on the subject can be found here : I 'm surprised to see that people are still linking to this .
It 's basically full of errors , and was written in rage [ opera.com ] over all the hype Unite was getting .
He was angry about how people just repeated Opera 's claims blindly .
Kind of like you are blindly referring to his blog post even though it turns out that the post is too inaccurate to really be used for anything .
You really should read some of the comments on the page you are linking to , in order to see people correcting all the misconceptions .
For example the misconception that everything goes through a proxy , as you claim it does .
Furthermore Chris 's comments where fun until Haavard took him down a notch on his own blog , resulting in Chris himself posting on Haavard 's blog with a massively different tone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A more thoughtful take on the subject can be found here:
I'm surprised to see that people are still linking to this.
It's basically full of errors, and was written in rage [opera.com] over all the hype Unite was getting.
He was angry about how people just repeated Opera's claims blindly.
Kind of like you are blindly referring to his blog post even though it turns out that the post is too inaccurate to really be used for anything.
You really should read some of the comments on the page you are linking to, in order to see people correcting all the misconceptions.
For example the misconception that everything goes through a proxy, as you claim it does.
Furthermore Chris's comments where fun until Haavard took him down a notch on his own blog, resulting in Chris himself posting on Haavard's blog with a massively different tone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385681</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245349860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SteelRealm, it's "than" not "then".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SteelRealm , it 's " than " not " then " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SteelRealm, it's "than" not "then".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385793</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>tpgp</author>
	<datestamp>1245351000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Plus, Opera hides in the systray, and stays completely idle until i need it, or it shows me a new RSS, or email.</i></p><p>So does it stay <b>completely idle</b>, or does it show you new RSS / emails as they come in?</p><p>Can't be both.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus , Opera hides in the systray , and stays completely idle until i need it , or it shows me a new RSS , or email.So does it stay completely idle , or does it show you new RSS / emails as they come in ? Ca n't be both .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus, Opera hides in the systray, and stays completely idle until i need it, or it shows me a new RSS, or email.So does it stay completely idle, or does it show you new RSS / emails as they come in?Can't be both.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731</id>
	<title>Misleading, again</title>
	<author>SteelRealm</author>
	<datestamp>1245340020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera's Unite is not meant to refine the web as a hosting solution in the traditional sense, but as a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.  I don't think anyone is questioning whether it is a better hosting solution then a dedicated server.

It's also worth it to note that Unite is a Alpha release with lots of bugs to be fixed and performance tuning and optimization to be done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera 's Unite is not meant to refine the web as a hosting solution in the traditional sense , but as a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it .
I do n't think anyone is questioning whether it is a better hosting solution then a dedicated server .
It 's also worth it to note that Unite is a Alpha release with lots of bugs to be fixed and performance tuning and optimization to be done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera's Unite is not meant to refine the web as a hosting solution in the traditional sense, but as a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.
I don't think anyone is questioning whether it is a better hosting solution then a dedicated server.
It's also worth it to note that Unite is a Alpha release with lots of bugs to be fixed and performance tuning and optimization to be done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading, again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245340920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Can you say "huge honking security hole"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it .
Can you say " huge honking security hole " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.
Can you say "huge honking security hole"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28389483</id>
	<title>It's a fuckin browser</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245424380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a fuckin browser with an addon that lets people share their files. Not a replacement for apache or something in almost all cases - if they are being used interchangably (or if you are using opera where something else shoudl be used, eg apache) you have a problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a fuckin browser with an addon that lets people share their files .
Not a replacement for apache or something in almost all cases - if they are being used interchangably ( or if you are using opera where something else shoudl be used , eg apache ) you have a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a fuckin browser with an addon that lets people share their files.
Not a replacement for apache or something in almost all cases - if they are being used interchangably (or if you are using opera where something else shoudl be used, eg apache) you have a problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885</id>
	<title>So Opera web browser now runs as a system service?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245341100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So much for Opera being a small, simple, fast web browser. It now has a browser, an email client, a jukebox and a web server all built in.<br> <br>
Hooray for feature bloat and big monolithic applications that try to do everything!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So much for Opera being a small , simple , fast web browser .
It now has a browser , an email client , a jukebox and a web server all built in .
Hooray for feature bloat and big monolithic applications that try to do everything !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So much for Opera being a small, simple, fast web browser.
It now has a browser, an email client, a jukebox and a web server all built in.
Hooray for feature bloat and big monolithic applications that try to do everything!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28396455</id>
	<title>Re:I feel vindicated to some extent</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245409200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where have you been?  People have used control panels to manage Apache for years now.   Check out Webmin for a decent example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where have you been ?
People have used control panels to manage Apache for years now .
Check out Webmin for a decent example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where have you been?
People have used control panels to manage Apache for years now.
Check out Webmin for a decent example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28388109</id>
	<title>I was really happy because...</title>
	<author>Damien1024</author>
	<datestamp>1245418080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For the longest time i've just wanted to setup something simple for getting my box at home to download stuff, not having NAT and UPNP and DynDNS kept me from doing this, in 30 minutes I hacked the blog example apart and got it to accept a name and link which I now export into a RSS feed which bittorrent can pick up, all running on the VERY slow laptop which I use for it, no RD or Log Me In or anything overblown like that just a happy lil downloading box... I guess I should password protect my lil app though otherwise I might find some really wierd stuff downloading on the box (at the moment it's plausable deniability, ha ha ha)</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the longest time i 've just wanted to setup something simple for getting my box at home to download stuff , not having NAT and UPNP and DynDNS kept me from doing this , in 30 minutes I hacked the blog example apart and got it to accept a name and link which I now export into a RSS feed which bittorrent can pick up , all running on the VERY slow laptop which I use for it , no RD or Log Me In or anything overblown like that just a happy lil downloading box... I guess I should password protect my lil app though otherwise I might find some really wierd stuff downloading on the box ( at the moment it 's plausable deniability , ha ha ha )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the longest time i've just wanted to setup something simple for getting my box at home to download stuff, not having NAT and UPNP and DynDNS kept me from doing this, in 30 minutes I hacked the blog example apart and got it to accept a name and link which I now export into a RSS feed which bittorrent can pick up, all running on the VERY slow laptop which I use for it, no RD or Log Me In or anything overblown like that just a happy lil downloading box... I guess I should password protect my lil app though otherwise I might find some really wierd stuff downloading on the box (at the moment it's plausable deniability, ha ha ha)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386131</id>
	<title>Interesting benchmark</title>
	<author>Jarlsberg</author>
	<datestamp>1245354360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's interesting to see that Nginx performs so well in comparison with the LAMP setup. I've setup a server at home using Nginx (<a href="http://magicode.org/" title="magicode.org">http://magicode.org/</a> [magicode.org]) and it really performs well, even though it's a very modest server (P4, 256MB ram, slow drives, basically a 10 year old computer with parts added on).
<p>
Regarding Unite, will people simply be using it to offload larger files and images, or will it be a genuine platform for people with no access to hosting? It's an interesting experiment by Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's interesting to see that Nginx performs so well in comparison with the LAMP setup .
I 've setup a server at home using Nginx ( http : //magicode.org/ [ magicode.org ] ) and it really performs well , even though it 's a very modest server ( P4 , 256MB ram , slow drives , basically a 10 year old computer with parts added on ) .
Regarding Unite , will people simply be using it to offload larger files and images , or will it be a genuine platform for people with no access to hosting ?
It 's an interesting experiment by Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's interesting to see that Nginx performs so well in comparison with the LAMP setup.
I've setup a server at home using Nginx (http://magicode.org/ [magicode.org]) and it really performs well, even though it's a very modest server (P4, 256MB ram, slow drives, basically a 10 year old computer with parts added on).
Regarding Unite, will people simply be using it to offload larger files and images, or will it be a genuine platform for people with no access to hosting?
It's an interesting experiment by Opera.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385355</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading, again</title>
	<author>patro</author>
	<datestamp>1245347040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Can you say "huge honking security hole"?</p></div><p>Every server is a security hole waiting to be fixed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.Can you say " huge honking security hole " ? Every server is a security hole waiting to be fixed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.Can you say "huge honking security hole"?Every server is a security hole waiting to be fixed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390011</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading, again</title>
	<author>jc42</author>
	<datestamp>1245426540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><blockquote><div><p>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Can you say "huge honking security hole"?</p></div></blockquote><p>Um, how so?  That sounds to me like a succinct description of what a web server is supposed to do.  Phrased differently, the "for dummies" definition of a web server is a program that you point at a directory, and it makes everything under that directory available via the Web.  This isn't a security hole; it's exactly what a web server is used for.  It's only a security hole if outsiders can use it to get at files outside the server's directory.</p><p>Do you really think that outside access to files that I want made public is a security hole?  That's what it sounds like people are saying.</p><p>Maybe I'm misreading something here, but so far I haven't read anything about Unite that qualifies as a security hole.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were one, but it'd be nice to read some details.  Calling "make your files accessible to others" a security hole is nonsense, when the tool was designed and described as doing exactly that.</p><p>Next we're going to hear email software described as a security hole because it allows others to read messages that you send to them.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.Can you say " huge honking security hole " ? Um , how so ?
That sounds to me like a succinct description of what a web server is supposed to do .
Phrased differently , the " for dummies " definition of a web server is a program that you point at a directory , and it makes everything under that directory available via the Web .
This is n't a security hole ; it 's exactly what a web server is used for .
It 's only a security hole if outsiders can use it to get at files outside the server 's directory.Do you really think that outside access to files that I want made public is a security hole ?
That 's what it sounds like people are saying.Maybe I 'm misreading something here , but so far I have n't read anything about Unite that qualifies as a security hole .
I would n't be surprised if there were one , but it 'd be nice to read some details .
Calling " make your files accessible to others " a security hole is nonsense , when the tool was designed and described as doing exactly that.Next we 're going to hear email software described as a security hole because it allows others to read messages that you send to them .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.Can you say "huge honking security hole"?Um, how so?
That sounds to me like a succinct description of what a web server is supposed to do.
Phrased differently, the "for dummies" definition of a web server is a program that you point at a directory, and it makes everything under that directory available via the Web.
This isn't a security hole; it's exactly what a web server is used for.
It's only a security hole if outsiders can use it to get at files outside the server's directory.Do you really think that outside access to files that I want made public is a security hole?
That's what it sounds like people are saying.Maybe I'm misreading something here, but so far I haven't read anything about Unite that qualifies as a security hole.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were one, but it'd be nice to read some details.
Calling "make your files accessible to others" a security hole is nonsense, when the tool was designed and described as doing exactly that.Next we're going to hear email software described as a security hole because it allows others to read messages that you send to them.
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387723</id>
	<title>Re:It's a toy...</title>
	<author>m50d</author>
	<datestamp>1245415320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Toy" is unfair; it's the correct tool for certain tasks. I find myself using the "web server" built into the KDE system panel (kpf) a lot more than my apache install, because most of the time I just want to put a particular file on the internet so I can link my friends to it. For that sort of thing, unite is great.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Toy " is unfair ; it 's the correct tool for certain tasks .
I find myself using the " web server " built into the KDE system panel ( kpf ) a lot more than my apache install , because most of the time I just want to put a particular file on the internet so I can link my friends to it .
For that sort of thing , unite is great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Toy" is unfair; it's the correct tool for certain tasks.
I find myself using the "web server" built into the KDE system panel (kpf) a lot more than my apache install, because most of the time I just want to put a particular file on the internet so I can link my friends to it.
For that sort of thing, unite is great.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384779</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387523</id>
	<title>Websites from behind corporate firewalls</title>
	<author>orin</author>
	<datestamp>1245413220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of the most fun things about Opera Unite is that it allows standard users to enable it and run websites from behind the corporate firewall. As long as Opera has been installed on a computer, a standard user doesn't need admin privileges to enable Unite. Most corporate firewalls won't block the traffic because the local version of opera will establish the session tunnel to the opera unite servers, through which all incoming web traffic will travel. More here: <a href="http://bit.ly/4gmpFv" title="bit.ly">http://bit.ly/4gmpFv</a> [bit.ly]</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the most fun things about Opera Unite is that it allows standard users to enable it and run websites from behind the corporate firewall .
As long as Opera has been installed on a computer , a standard user does n't need admin privileges to enable Unite .
Most corporate firewalls wo n't block the traffic because the local version of opera will establish the session tunnel to the opera unite servers , through which all incoming web traffic will travel .
More here : http : //bit.ly/4gmpFv [ bit.ly ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the most fun things about Opera Unite is that it allows standard users to enable it and run websites from behind the corporate firewall.
As long as Opera has been installed on a computer, a standard user doesn't need admin privileges to enable Unite.
Most corporate firewalls won't block the traffic because the local version of opera will establish the session tunnel to the opera unite servers, through which all incoming web traffic will travel.
More here: http://bit.ly/4gmpFv [bit.ly]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753</id>
	<title>Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>nausea\_malvarma</author>
	<datestamp>1245340140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm disturbed by the centralization taking place on the web, where by networks like email are replaced with proprietary walled-garden social networks, and entire webpages once written in the open html standard are being done entirely in flash. I'm starting to have hope for the future now. HMTL 5 will reduce the need for proprietary plugins, for sure. This Opera web server thing could work towards decentralizing the web as well. Sure, anybody can set up a web server to host their own content in theory, but its too difficult for average folks to do. With this technology, perhaps more people will sidestep commercial options, and host web pages on their own - meaning less reliance on geocities, google sites, ect. And thats good. It's not healthy for a few companies to have that sort of control over a medium.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm disturbed by the centralization taking place on the web , where by networks like email are replaced with proprietary walled-garden social networks , and entire webpages once written in the open html standard are being done entirely in flash .
I 'm starting to have hope for the future now .
HMTL 5 will reduce the need for proprietary plugins , for sure .
This Opera web server thing could work towards decentralizing the web as well .
Sure , anybody can set up a web server to host their own content in theory , but its too difficult for average folks to do .
With this technology , perhaps more people will sidestep commercial options , and host web pages on their own - meaning less reliance on geocities , google sites , ect .
And thats good .
It 's not healthy for a few companies to have that sort of control over a medium .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm disturbed by the centralization taking place on the web, where by networks like email are replaced with proprietary walled-garden social networks, and entire webpages once written in the open html standard are being done entirely in flash.
I'm starting to have hope for the future now.
HMTL 5 will reduce the need for proprietary plugins, for sure.
This Opera web server thing could work towards decentralizing the web as well.
Sure, anybody can set up a web server to host their own content in theory, but its too difficult for average folks to do.
With this technology, perhaps more people will sidestep commercial options, and host web pages on their own - meaning less reliance on geocities, google sites, ect.
And thats good.
It's not healthy for a few companies to have that sort of control over a medium.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386989</id>
	<title>Re:What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245406980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what is it with you not realizing that SPEED IS EVERYTHING when it comes to web servers?<br>Enjoy serving webpages with Windows Vista on a C64, if you can even manage to load the damn thing. (and if you can, you might win some sort of award)</p><p>Nobody wants to wait an age for a page to load.</p><p>And that is actually one of the drawbacks with OU, they have filled pages with images in one hell of an amateurish way.<br>Not meaning to insult, it is easier, but DAMN, come on!  Half the images i saw loading up do not need to be there.<br>And to be perfectly honest, i'd rather be able to turn off every image.  (well, except some basic images, but even then, they can still be created entirely in HTML+CSS with border polygons for older browsers)<br>I, like millions of others, have limited bandwidth.  Testing out the servers with some friends has almost been painful at times waiting for images loading.<br>This is one of the major parts that need redoing or it simply won't take off, period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what is it with you not realizing that SPEED IS EVERYTHING when it comes to web servers ? Enjoy serving webpages with Windows Vista on a C64 , if you can even manage to load the damn thing .
( and if you can , you might win some sort of award ) Nobody wants to wait an age for a page to load.And that is actually one of the drawbacks with OU , they have filled pages with images in one hell of an amateurish way.Not meaning to insult , it is easier , but DAMN , come on !
Half the images i saw loading up do not need to be there.And to be perfectly honest , i 'd rather be able to turn off every image .
( well , except some basic images , but even then , they can still be created entirely in HTML + CSS with border polygons for older browsers ) I , like millions of others , have limited bandwidth .
Testing out the servers with some friends has almost been painful at times waiting for images loading.This is one of the major parts that need redoing or it simply wo n't take off , period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what is it with you not realizing that SPEED IS EVERYTHING when it comes to web servers?Enjoy serving webpages with Windows Vista on a C64, if you can even manage to load the damn thing.
(and if you can, you might win some sort of award)Nobody wants to wait an age for a page to load.And that is actually one of the drawbacks with OU, they have filled pages with images in one hell of an amateurish way.Not meaning to insult, it is easier, but DAMN, come on!
Half the images i saw loading up do not need to be there.And to be perfectly honest, i'd rather be able to turn off every image.
(well, except some basic images, but even then, they can still be created entirely in HTML+CSS with border polygons for older browsers)I, like millions of others, have limited bandwidth.
Testing out the servers with some friends has almost been painful at times waiting for images loading.This is one of the major parts that need redoing or it simply won't take off, period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386173</id>
	<title>Re:What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1245354720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And yet somehow, the summary doesn't even mention the speed of the Opera personal webserver:<blockquote><div><p>But how well does it actually perform? Is it a threat to other server solutions? Someone put it to the test, and published the results. While nginx, one of the fastest web servers available, is 5 times faster, a PHP+Apache+MySQL server is only 2 times as fast. A compiled C++ server, the MadFish WebToolkit, is 6 times faster. He concludes that Opera Unite's server is impressive, and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use.</p></div></blockquote><p>They were able to cover the speeds of several others, but not Opera? Sorry, this is fucking bullshit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And yet somehow , the summary does n't even mention the speed of the Opera personal webserver : But how well does it actually perform ?
Is it a threat to other server solutions ?
Someone put it to the test , and published the results .
While nginx , one of the fastest web servers available , is 5 times faster , a PHP + Apache + MySQL server is only 2 times as fast .
A compiled C + + server , the MadFish WebToolkit , is 6 times faster .
He concludes that Opera Unite 's server is impressive , and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use.They were able to cover the speeds of several others , but not Opera ?
Sorry , this is fucking bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And yet somehow, the summary doesn't even mention the speed of the Opera personal webserver:But how well does it actually perform?
Is it a threat to other server solutions?
Someone put it to the test, and published the results.
While nginx, one of the fastest web servers available, is 5 times faster, a PHP+Apache+MySQL server is only 2 times as fast.
A compiled C++ server, the MadFish WebToolkit, is 6 times faster.
He concludes that Opera Unite's server is impressive, and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use.They were able to cover the speeds of several others, but not Opera?
Sorry, this is fucking bullshit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385119</id>
	<title>"Someone"?</title>
	<author>adavies42</author>
	<datestamp>1245343860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Someone put it to the test</p></div><p>"Someone"? Really? Color me paranoid, but I'd be inclined to suspect at least a little bias from a website named "unitehowto.com". Are we sure kdawson didn't get hold of timothy's posting account?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone put it to the test " Someone " ?
Really ? Color me paranoid , but I 'd be inclined to suspect at least a little bias from a website named " unitehowto.com " .
Are we sure kdawson did n't get hold of timothy 's posting account ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone put it to the test"Someone"?
Really? Color me paranoid, but I'd be inclined to suspect at least a little bias from a website named "unitehowto.com".
Are we sure kdawson didn't get hold of timothy's posting account?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385613</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>dreemernj</author>
	<datestamp>1245349080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera 10 is dramatically outshining everything they did in Opera 9.x.  9.x actually led me to try Chrome out more regularly because of performance and stability issues (at least on a modern computer).  Opera 10 has been a dream.<br>
<br>
On my older computers I don't really have another option.  I run  500Mhz Celeron comps with 64-128MB RAM running Damn Small Linux regularly.  Firefox barely runs with one tab on those systems while Opera is still quick with 4 or 5 tabs.  The difference is night and day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera 10 is dramatically outshining everything they did in Opera 9.x .
9.x actually led me to try Chrome out more regularly because of performance and stability issues ( at least on a modern computer ) .
Opera 10 has been a dream .
On my older computers I do n't really have another option .
I run 500Mhz Celeron comps with 64-128MB RAM running Damn Small Linux regularly .
Firefox barely runs with one tab on those systems while Opera is still quick with 4 or 5 tabs .
The difference is night and day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera 10 is dramatically outshining everything they did in Opera 9.x.
9.x actually led me to try Chrome out more regularly because of performance and stability issues (at least on a modern computer).
Opera 10 has been a dream.
On my older computers I don't really have another option.
I run  500Mhz Celeron comps with 64-128MB RAM running Damn Small Linux regularly.
Firefox barely runs with one tab on those systems while Opera is still quick with 4 or 5 tabs.
The difference is night and day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>sjstrutt</author>
	<datestamp>1245342300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera Unite is not as decentralized as you may think. It still requires that you initialize connections via the machinename.username.operaunite.com domain that you are required to register with Opera.  Sure, this is set up to easily traverse a NAT, but it isnt as decentralized as advertised (and you're restricted from hosting content that they consider "obscene, vulgar, hateful, threatening, or that violates any laws".</p><p>A more thoughtful take on the subject can be found here: <a href="http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2009/06/16/thoughts-on-opera-unite/" title="factoryjoe.com" rel="nofollow">http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2009/06/16/thoughts-on-opera-unite/</a> [factoryjoe.com] </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera Unite is not as decentralized as you may think .
It still requires that you initialize connections via the machinename.username.operaunite.com domain that you are required to register with Opera .
Sure , this is set up to easily traverse a NAT , but it isnt as decentralized as advertised ( and you 're restricted from hosting content that they consider " obscene , vulgar , hateful , threatening , or that violates any laws " .A more thoughtful take on the subject can be found here : http : //factoryjoe.com/blog/2009/06/16/thoughts-on-opera-unite/ [ factoryjoe.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera Unite is not as decentralized as you may think.
It still requires that you initialize connections via the machinename.username.operaunite.com domain that you are required to register with Opera.
Sure, this is set up to easily traverse a NAT, but it isnt as decentralized as advertised (and you're restricted from hosting content that they consider "obscene, vulgar, hateful, threatening, or that violates any laws".A more thoughtful take on the subject can be found here: http://factoryjoe.com/blog/2009/06/16/thoughts-on-opera-unite/ [factoryjoe.com] </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387711</id>
	<title>Re:Stupid benchmark</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1245415200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'll go ahead and assume that the article isn't worth reading.</p></div><p>You had to read the summary to jump to that conclusion??</p><p>O\_o</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll go ahead and assume that the article is n't worth reading.You had to read the summary to jump to that conclusion ?
? O \ _o</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll go ahead and assume that the article isn't worth reading.You had to read the summary to jump to that conclusion?
?O\_o
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28401059</id>
	<title>Re:Can someone else honestly tag this...</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245505500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I don't care about "813 r/s"; saying that figure means nothing. And what hardware exactly?</p></div></blockquote><p>
People with more than half a brain would have RTFA and seen the hardware specs in the original post. Funny how you talk about low quality, and yet your comment is obviously based on not bothering to read the thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care about " 813 r/s " ; saying that figure means nothing .
And what hardware exactly ?
People with more than half a brain would have RTFA and seen the hardware specs in the original post .
Funny how you talk about low quality , and yet your comment is obviously based on not bothering to read the thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care about "813 r/s"; saying that figure means nothing.
And what hardware exactly?
People with more than half a brain would have RTFA and seen the hardware specs in the original post.
Funny how you talk about low quality, and yet your comment is obviously based on not bothering to read the thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387729</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385907</id>
	<title>v300.motofan.ru</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245352200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow bonanza for hackers!!!!!!! Yehhha<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow bonanza for hackers ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Yehhha : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow bonanza for hackers!!!!!!!
Yehhha :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385189</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sure, anybody can set up a web server to host their own content in theory, but its too difficult for average folks to do. With this technology, perhaps more people will sidestep commercial options, and host web pages on their own - meaning less reliance on geocities, google sites, ect. And thats good. It's not healthy for a few companies to have that sort of control over</p></div></blockquote><p>Years ago, I remember certain broadband ISPs would probe certain ports on the customer's side (HTTP, FTP, etc) and do a variety of dickhead things if they found a server running (automatically update the customer to a more expensive plan, send warnings, terminate service) even if the "server" was serving no content or if a different application was listening on the port. Do companies still do this anymore?</p><p>Way back when I first learned about how TCP/IP worked, I knew that content corporations would always try to somehow override or make irrelevant the fact that the Internet is just a big network of peers rather than a "we only sell, you only buy" arrangement. It's the center issue of the whole net neutrality thing. It's just nice to see some companies at least trying to put more control back into the hands of the user.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure , anybody can set up a web server to host their own content in theory , but its too difficult for average folks to do .
With this technology , perhaps more people will sidestep commercial options , and host web pages on their own - meaning less reliance on geocities , google sites , ect .
And thats good .
It 's not healthy for a few companies to have that sort of control overYears ago , I remember certain broadband ISPs would probe certain ports on the customer 's side ( HTTP , FTP , etc ) and do a variety of dickhead things if they found a server running ( automatically update the customer to a more expensive plan , send warnings , terminate service ) even if the " server " was serving no content or if a different application was listening on the port .
Do companies still do this anymore ? Way back when I first learned about how TCP/IP worked , I knew that content corporations would always try to somehow override or make irrelevant the fact that the Internet is just a big network of peers rather than a " we only sell , you only buy " arrangement .
It 's the center issue of the whole net neutrality thing .
It 's just nice to see some companies at least trying to put more control back into the hands of the user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure, anybody can set up a web server to host their own content in theory, but its too difficult for average folks to do.
With this technology, perhaps more people will sidestep commercial options, and host web pages on their own - meaning less reliance on geocities, google sites, ect.
And thats good.
It's not healthy for a few companies to have that sort of control overYears ago, I remember certain broadband ISPs would probe certain ports on the customer's side (HTTP, FTP, etc) and do a variety of dickhead things if they found a server running (automatically update the customer to a more expensive plan, send warnings, terminate service) even if the "server" was serving no content or if a different application was listening on the port.
Do companies still do this anymore?Way back when I first learned about how TCP/IP worked, I knew that content corporations would always try to somehow override or make irrelevant the fact that the Internet is just a big network of peers rather than a "we only sell, you only buy" arrangement.
It's the center issue of the whole net neutrality thing.
It's just nice to see some companies at least trying to put more control back into the hands of the user.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385449</id>
	<title>Re:Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>Fallingcow</author>
	<datestamp>1245347760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier, get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page.</p></div></blockquote><p>I can set up 40GB+ of music to play via a decent-looking web interface for anyone I send a password and URL to in less than a minute and with 5 or 6 clicks using my Facebook account and some shared web hosting?  'Cuz I did that earlier today with Opera Unite.</p><p>I went in to this skeptical, and I barely even used Opera before this (I'm a web developer and, though I admire Opera, I <i>need</i> the tools available in Firefox) but it only took about 5 minutes of tinkering with this thing for me to be sold on it.  I believe my exact words on testing the media sharing were "whoa, fuckin' cool!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier , get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page.I can set up 40GB + of music to play via a decent-looking web interface for anyone I send a password and URL to in less than a minute and with 5 or 6 clicks using my Facebook account and some shared web hosting ?
'Cuz I did that earlier today with Opera Unite.I went in to this skeptical , and I barely even used Opera before this ( I 'm a web developer and , though I admire Opera , I need the tools available in Firefox ) but it only took about 5 minutes of tinkering with this thing for me to be sold on it .
I believe my exact words on testing the media sharing were " whoa , fuckin ' cool !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to do all the tasks done by Unite but easier, get cheap or free web hosting and a Facebook page.I can set up 40GB+ of music to play via a decent-looking web interface for anyone I send a password and URL to in less than a minute and with 5 or 6 clicks using my Facebook account and some shared web hosting?
'Cuz I did that earlier today with Opera Unite.I went in to this skeptical, and I barely even used Opera before this (I'm a web developer and, though I admire Opera, I need the tools available in Firefox) but it only took about 5 minutes of tinkering with this thing for me to be sold on it.
I believe my exact words on testing the media sharing were "whoa, fuckin' cool!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384873</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245340980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm disturbed by the centralization taking place on the web, where by networks like email are replaced with proprietary walled-garden social networks</p></div><p>Personally I've switched to Facebook for most of my correspondence instead of email.  Why?  Spam.  I get maybe 300 spams for every legitimate email I get.  While Gmail filters most of it, it also occasionally catches the few legitmate emails.  With Facebook I get zero spam.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm disturbed by the centralization taking place on the web , where by networks like email are replaced with proprietary walled-garden social networksPersonally I 've switched to Facebook for most of my correspondence instead of email .
Why ? Spam .
I get maybe 300 spams for every legitimate email I get .
While Gmail filters most of it , it also occasionally catches the few legitmate emails .
With Facebook I get zero spam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm disturbed by the centralization taking place on the web, where by networks like email are replaced with proprietary walled-garden social networksPersonally I've switched to Facebook for most of my correspondence instead of email.
Why?  Spam.
I get maybe 300 spams for every legitimate email I get.
While Gmail filters most of it, it also occasionally catches the few legitmate emails.
With Facebook I get zero spam.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386857</id>
	<title>That you are comapring Opera and Apache...</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1245405360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... tells me how correct the people that chastised you were.</p><p>I will repeat the advice: leave Apache alone, it is for people that know what they are doing (and having a point and click interface will not improve your understanding of what Apache is doing).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... tells me how correct the people that chastised you were.I will repeat the advice : leave Apache alone , it is for people that know what they are doing ( and having a point and click interface will not improve your understanding of what Apache is doing ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... tells me how correct the people that chastised you were.I will repeat the advice: leave Apache alone, it is for people that know what they are doing (and having a point and click interface will not improve your understanding of what Apache is doing).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28388559</id>
	<title>super super idea</title>
	<author>cinnamon colbert</author>
	<datestamp>1245420480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think I'm the target customer, and i think putting a web server in the browser is a fabulous idea.<br>The market logic is as follows: people like me, who don't know anythiing about web server technology, or php or mysql, except that a lot of really cool software requires this stuff. Many times I personally have tried to install things like mysql or whatever, and the language and gui and whole gestalt is just totally wrong - orienteted to the tech expert, not the non specialist.</p><p>I think putting a web server in a browser could spark a real huge change in the way people like me - I'm the sort of guy who is first to try the software, the sort of guy who got everyone to use firefox, the sort of guy people come to when they need a utility - interact with their computers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I 'm the target customer , and i think putting a web server in the browser is a fabulous idea.The market logic is as follows : people like me , who do n't know anythiing about web server technology , or php or mysql , except that a lot of really cool software requires this stuff .
Many times I personally have tried to install things like mysql or whatever , and the language and gui and whole gestalt is just totally wrong - orienteted to the tech expert , not the non specialist.I think putting a web server in a browser could spark a real huge change in the way people like me - I 'm the sort of guy who is first to try the software , the sort of guy who got everyone to use firefox , the sort of guy people come to when they need a utility - interact with their computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I'm the target customer, and i think putting a web server in the browser is a fabulous idea.The market logic is as follows: people like me, who don't know anythiing about web server technology, or php or mysql, except that a lot of really cool software requires this stuff.
Many times I personally have tried to install things like mysql or whatever, and the language and gui and whole gestalt is just totally wrong - orienteted to the tech expert, not the non specialist.I think putting a web server in a browser could spark a real huge change in the way people like me - I'm the sort of guy who is first to try the software, the sort of guy who got everyone to use firefox, the sort of guy people come to when they need a utility - interact with their computers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386363</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245442740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget that it handles torrents as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget that it handles torrents as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget that it handles torrents as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384829</id>
	<title>By Neruos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245340680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, I didn't think this was going to get so much attention on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. But here we are going on 2+ threads in a week about this product. I was going to post the 2 hacks I found in the webserver, but I think I'll wait until a bunch of people use it then sell the backdoors to the highest bidder.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , I did n't think this was going to get so much attention on / .
But here we are going on 2 + threads in a week about this product .
I was going to post the 2 hacks I found in the webserver , but I think I 'll wait until a bunch of people use it then sell the backdoors to the highest bidder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, I didn't think this was going to get so much attention on /.
But here we are going on 2+ threads in a week about this product.
I was going to post the 2 hacks I found in the webserver, but I think I'll wait until a bunch of people use it then sell the backdoors to the highest bidder.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386873</id>
	<title>Re:What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245405480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We developed this new console that's so easy to use. you just point this remote at the screen, anybody from young to old can just pick up and play."</p><p>"Yeah, but how fast is it?"</p><p>"You don't understand, this is totally changing the future of games consoles, from now on everything is going to be motion controlled. Its never going to be the same again!"</p><p>"Yeah, but how fast is it?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We developed this new console that 's so easy to use .
you just point this remote at the screen , anybody from young to old can just pick up and play .
" " Yeah , but how fast is it ?
" " You do n't understand , this is totally changing the future of games consoles , from now on everything is going to be motion controlled .
Its never going to be the same again !
" " Yeah , but how fast is it ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We developed this new console that's so easy to use.
you just point this remote at the screen, anybody from young to old can just pick up and play.
""Yeah, but how fast is it?
""You don't understand, this is totally changing the future of games consoles, from now on everything is going to be motion controlled.
Its never going to be the same again!
""Yeah, but how fast is it?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</id>
	<title>What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245347520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How dumb, or seriously ADD,<br>do you have to be, when the major question you ask about<br>a new technology is: Yeah, but how fast is it?</p><p>"We've invented this program that is smarter than the average bear"</p><p>"Yeah, but how fast is it?"</p><p>"You don't understand! This baby even knows that you're not SUPPOSED<br>to fight forest fires!"</p><p>"Yeah, but how fast is it?"</p><p>Seriously, these speed evaluations are irrelevant, boring, and inane to<br>the extreme. How about some evaluation of the possible uses this new<br>technology will be put to, and how its abilities to support these uses<br>compares to other competing or similar technologies.</p><p>"Look at this new amp we've got! Look at this. It goes up to 11! Unbelievable!"</p><p>"Yeah, but how fast does it go pedal to the metal, man?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How dumb , or seriously ADD,do you have to be , when the major question you ask abouta new technology is : Yeah , but how fast is it ?
" We 've invented this program that is smarter than the average bear " " Yeah , but how fast is it ?
" " You do n't understand !
This baby even knows that you 're not SUPPOSEDto fight forest fires !
" " Yeah , but how fast is it ?
" Seriously , these speed evaluations are irrelevant , boring , and inane tothe extreme .
How about some evaluation of the possible uses this newtechnology will be put to , and how its abilities to support these usescompares to other competing or similar technologies .
" Look at this new amp we 've got !
Look at this .
It goes up to 11 !
Unbelievable ! " " Yeah , but how fast does it go pedal to the metal , man ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How dumb, or seriously ADD,do you have to be, when the major question you ask abouta new technology is: Yeah, but how fast is it?
"We've invented this program that is smarter than the average bear""Yeah, but how fast is it?
""You don't understand!
This baby even knows that you're not SUPPOSEDto fight forest fires!
""Yeah, but how fast is it?
"Seriously, these speed evaluations are irrelevant, boring, and inane tothe extreme.
How about some evaluation of the possible uses this newtechnology will be put to, and how its abilities to support these usescompares to other competing or similar technologies.
"Look at this new amp we've got!
Look at this.
It goes up to 11!
Unbelievable!""Yeah, but how fast does it go pedal to the metal, man?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385885</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1245352020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is an Alpha or Beta. Opera 9.64 (final) is only 5.3MB large.</p><p>On my computer Firefox consumes <i>way</i> more memory than Opera - but it has so many extensions and plugins installed, that I'd be surprised if it didn't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is an Alpha or Beta .
Opera 9.64 ( final ) is only 5.3MB large.On my computer Firefox consumes way more memory than Opera - but it has so many extensions and plugins installed , that I 'd be surprised if it did n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is an Alpha or Beta.
Opera 9.64 (final) is only 5.3MB large.On my computer Firefox consumes way more memory than Opera - but it has so many extensions and plugins installed, that I'd be surprised if it didn't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387123</id>
	<title>Opera Unite with Ubuntu</title>
	<author>zbharucha</author>
	<datestamp>1245408600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I tried to use the features offered by Unite on Opera 10 in Ubuntu (9.04). No dice. In fact, Unite doesn't even seem to exist in my install of Opera. What am I doing wrong?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I tried to use the features offered by Unite on Opera 10 in Ubuntu ( 9.04 ) .
No dice .
In fact , Unite does n't even seem to exist in my install of Opera .
What am I doing wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I tried to use the features offered by Unite on Opera 10 in Ubuntu (9.04).
No dice.
In fact, Unite doesn't even seem to exist in my install of Opera.
What am I doing wrong?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391949</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading, again</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1245434940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Opera's Unite is not meant to refine the web as a hosting solution in the traditional sense, but as a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.</p></div></blockquote><p>But how, exactly, does that <i>differ</i> from the role of hosting "in the traditional sense"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera 's Unite is not meant to refine the web as a hosting solution in the traditional sense , but as a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.But how , exactly , does that differ from the role of hosting " in the traditional sense " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera's Unite is not meant to refine the web as a hosting solution in the traditional sense, but as a way to make your files accessible to yourself and others through it.But how, exactly, does that differ from the role of hosting "in the traditional sense"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28400899</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1245503040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>you do know that Opera Unite will send everything through Opera's servers right?</p></div></blockquote><p>
No it won't. It will use UPnP, and as a fallback it will use a proxy server for routing.</p><blockquote><div><p>So I'm afraid it doesn't work like you think it does.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I'm afraid you are spreading FUD.</p><blockquote><div><p>I predict Opera will hang on for another year or two</p></div></blockquote><p>
LOL. People have been saying that for 15 years. But the market is going where Opera wants it to go. Yes, their mobile division is doing incredibly well, and it will only do better. Also, Opera's desktop user base has more than doubled in less than 2 years. How's that for "hanging on"? You doom-sayers crack me up. You have been wrong about Opera for 15 years, and will for at least 15 more. The worst that can happen to Opera is that they are bought up by some other company. Otherwise they'll continue to thrive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you do know that Opera Unite will send everything through Opera 's servers right ?
No it wo n't .
It will use UPnP , and as a fallback it will use a proxy server for routing.So I 'm afraid it does n't work like you think it does .
I 'm afraid you are spreading FUD.I predict Opera will hang on for another year or two LOL .
People have been saying that for 15 years .
But the market is going where Opera wants it to go .
Yes , their mobile division is doing incredibly well , and it will only do better .
Also , Opera 's desktop user base has more than doubled in less than 2 years .
How 's that for " hanging on " ?
You doom-sayers crack me up .
You have been wrong about Opera for 15 years , and will for at least 15 more .
The worst that can happen to Opera is that they are bought up by some other company .
Otherwise they 'll continue to thrive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you do know that Opera Unite will send everything through Opera's servers right?
No it won't.
It will use UPnP, and as a fallback it will use a proxy server for routing.So I'm afraid it doesn't work like you think it does.
I'm afraid you are spreading FUD.I predict Opera will hang on for another year or two
LOL.
People have been saying that for 15 years.
But the market is going where Opera wants it to go.
Yes, their mobile division is doing incredibly well, and it will only do better.
Also, Opera's desktop user base has more than doubled in less than 2 years.
How's that for "hanging on"?
You doom-sayers crack me up.
You have been wrong about Opera for 15 years, and will for at least 15 more.
The worst that can happen to Opera is that they are bought up by some other company.
Otherwise they'll continue to thrive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385033</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390895</id>
	<title>how bad it can be</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245430380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it is just my bad attitude, but there is something I can't really understand: it seems that Opera Unite is by far the slowest web server around, so why the guy has to say that it does an "impressive 800 requests per second" or that it uses "very smart file I/O!", well what if it doesn't?
I mean, have you read what happens when you do more than thirteen connection (thirteen not 2^32)? The article should be renamed "Opera Unite benchmark: you won't believe how bad it can be..."!

cheers</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it is just my bad attitude , but there is something I ca n't really understand : it seems that Opera Unite is by far the slowest web server around , so why the guy has to say that it does an " impressive 800 requests per second " or that it uses " very smart file I/O !
" , well what if it does n't ?
I mean , have you read what happens when you do more than thirteen connection ( thirteen not 2 ^ 32 ) ?
The article should be renamed " Opera Unite benchmark : you wo n't believe how bad it can be... " !
cheers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it is just my bad attitude, but there is something I can't really understand: it seems that Opera Unite is by far the slowest web server around, so why the guy has to say that it does an "impressive 800 requests per second" or that it uses "very smart file I/O!
", well what if it doesn't?
I mean, have you read what happens when you do more than thirteen connection (thirteen not 2^32)?
The article should be renamed "Opera Unite benchmark: you won't believe how bad it can be..."!
cheers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385491</id>
	<title>Oh no! I'm going to kill my HDD!</title>
	<author>chdig</author>
	<datestamp>1245348120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>From TFA:<br>
"Well, since I don't want to kill my HDD I'm doing a test where PHP takes a value from simple MySQL table, increments a value and saves it back (using a set of functions that are typically used in web programming)"<br> <br>
What am I going to do?!  I'm running complicated PHP scripts on my development machine... is my hard disk going to die?<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>..<br>
but seriously, the author is converting the value received from an integer column in mysql to... an integer:<br>
$i=intval($i)+1;<br>
--<br>
What happened to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and why are the most incompetent articles imaginable being posted?</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " Well , since I do n't want to kill my HDD I 'm doing a test where PHP takes a value from simple MySQL table , increments a value and saves it back ( using a set of functions that are typically used in web programming ) " What am I going to do ? !
I 'm running complicated PHP scripts on my development machine... is my hard disk going to die ?
. . but seriously , the author is converting the value received from an integer column in mysql to... an integer : $ i = intval ( $ i ) + 1 ; -- What happened to / .
and why are the most incompetent articles imaginable being posted ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:
"Well, since I don't want to kill my HDD I'm doing a test where PHP takes a value from simple MySQL table, increments a value and saves it back (using a set of functions that are typically used in web programming)" 
What am I going to do?!
I'm running complicated PHP scripts on my development machine... is my hard disk going to die?
..
but seriously, the author is converting the value received from an integer column in mysql to... an integer:
$i=intval($i)+1;
--
What happened to /.
and why are the most incompetent articles imaginable being posted?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245344640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>No it isn't. That's something so easy to verify i can't beleive you're at +4 right now.<br> <br>
<a href="http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/" title="mozilla.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/</a> [mozilla.com] <br>
<a href="http://unite.opera.com/" title="opera.com" rel="nofollow">http://unite.opera.com/</a> [opera.com] <br> <br>
Opera Unite is a 40\% larger download than Firefox.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No it is n't .
That 's something so easy to verify i ca n't beleive you 're at + 4 right now .
http : //www.mozilla.com/firefox/ [ mozilla.com ] http : //unite.opera.com/ [ opera.com ] Opera Unite is a 40 \ % larger download than Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it isn't.
That's something so easy to verify i can't beleive you're at +4 right now.
http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/ [mozilla.com] 
http://unite.opera.com/ [opera.com]  
Opera Unite is a 40\% larger download than Firefox.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387253</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading, again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245409980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Amen.</p><p>The Opera Unite service has several features so far: web server, file sharer, music streamer, fridge notes, lounge... It's direct communication for everyday users who will be able to host their own sites, files, music, photos locally on their home computers. Said content will be available as long as Unite is running. When Unite is not running or the computer is off, there's nothing being shared. Why all the fuss? it's easy to understand. Don't like it? Don't use it. The service is what it is, not a professional hosting service with backups and UPS's.</p><p>I think it's very good for home users to have the possibility of feeling like small Internet moguls, hosting some little web site and sharing family photos with grandma<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Amen.The Opera Unite service has several features so far : web server , file sharer , music streamer , fridge notes , lounge... It 's direct communication for everyday users who will be able to host their own sites , files , music , photos locally on their home computers .
Said content will be available as long as Unite is running .
When Unite is not running or the computer is off , there 's nothing being shared .
Why all the fuss ?
it 's easy to understand .
Do n't like it ?
Do n't use it .
The service is what it is , not a professional hosting service with backups and UPS 's.I think it 's very good for home users to have the possibility of feeling like small Internet moguls , hosting some little web site and sharing family photos with grandma : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amen.The Opera Unite service has several features so far: web server, file sharer, music streamer, fridge notes, lounge... It's direct communication for everyday users who will be able to host their own sites, files, music, photos locally on their home computers.
Said content will be available as long as Unite is running.
When Unite is not running or the computer is off, there's nothing being shared.
Why all the fuss?
it's easy to understand.
Don't like it?
Don't use it.
The service is what it is, not a professional hosting service with backups and UPS's.I think it's very good for home users to have the possibility of feeling like small Internet moguls, hosting some little web site and sharing family photos with grandma :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385513</id>
	<title>I Call Shenanigans</title>
	<author>mpapet</author>
	<datestamp>1245348360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Can you say "huge honking security hole"?</i></p><p>The great news is there are viable replacements for this reference to Microsoft's operating system. Debian, BSD's, maybe some other Linux distro are more than capable of serving and Opera runs on all of them.</p><p>Another Opera summary that's mostly flamebait.  That's disappointing because it's a good idea whose time has been very long in coming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you say " huge honking security hole " ? The great news is there are viable replacements for this reference to Microsoft 's operating system .
Debian , BSD 's , maybe some other Linux distro are more than capable of serving and Opera runs on all of them.Another Opera summary that 's mostly flamebait .
That 's disappointing because it 's a good idea whose time has been very long in coming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you say "huge honking security hole"?The great news is there are viable replacements for this reference to Microsoft's operating system.
Debian, BSD's, maybe some other Linux distro are more than capable of serving and Opera runs on all of them.Another Opera summary that's mostly flamebait.
That's disappointing because it's a good idea whose time has been very long in coming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386095</id>
	<title>Re:What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>tecnico.hitos</author>
	<datestamp>1245353940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is that sometimes you need speed instead of features that you probably won't even use.</p><p>If the speed of an application is below the expected for its main use and the additional features don't compensate for the lost speed, there will be a productivity loss.</p><p>You say there is a "juvenile fascination" with speed, but the same can be said about new (or not so new) technologies that introduce new features to applications, even if they don't add anything to the so-to-speak standard purpose of the application. It may end up as a "juvenile fascination" with novelty.</p><p>Speed is important for many and optimization is technology too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that sometimes you need speed instead of features that you probably wo n't even use.If the speed of an application is below the expected for its main use and the additional features do n't compensate for the lost speed , there will be a productivity loss.You say there is a " juvenile fascination " with speed , but the same can be said about new ( or not so new ) technologies that introduce new features to applications , even if they do n't add anything to the so-to-speak standard purpose of the application .
It may end up as a " juvenile fascination " with novelty.Speed is important for many and optimization is technology too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that sometimes you need speed instead of features that you probably won't even use.If the speed of an application is below the expected for its main use and the additional features don't compensate for the lost speed, there will be a productivity loss.You say there is a "juvenile fascination" with speed, but the same can be said about new (or not so new) technologies that introduce new features to applications, even if they don't add anything to the so-to-speak standard purpose of the application.
It may end up as a "juvenile fascination" with novelty.Speed is important for many and optimization is technology too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385807</id>
	<title>Re:What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245351060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thing is that it really is NOT new technology - it is just a web server with shiny wrapping.  Speed benchmarks are an easily quantifiable measure of quality, and, should there be a high enough demand on the software, a major issue.  Ease of use, sleekness of looks, and level of innovation are all things that are more subjective than objective.</p><p>The speed benchmarks tell us if, all other things being equal, which product we should use.  In computer software, quickness of execution is the primary currency that you work in.  You give up speed in order to get more features or benefits, such as more eye-candy, more features, easier to support code, or time spent in development.   At the end of the day, the software that does what you want it to, as easily as you want it to, with the smallest memory footprint and smallest cpu cycles used, should be the one that you pick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is that it really is NOT new technology - it is just a web server with shiny wrapping .
Speed benchmarks are an easily quantifiable measure of quality , and , should there be a high enough demand on the software , a major issue .
Ease of use , sleekness of looks , and level of innovation are all things that are more subjective than objective.The speed benchmarks tell us if , all other things being equal , which product we should use .
In computer software , quickness of execution is the primary currency that you work in .
You give up speed in order to get more features or benefits , such as more eye-candy , more features , easier to support code , or time spent in development .
At the end of the day , the software that does what you want it to , as easily as you want it to , with the smallest memory footprint and smallest cpu cycles used , should be the one that you pick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is that it really is NOT new technology - it is just a web server with shiny wrapping.
Speed benchmarks are an easily quantifiable measure of quality, and, should there be a high enough demand on the software, a major issue.
Ease of use, sleekness of looks, and level of innovation are all things that are more subjective than objective.The speed benchmarks tell us if, all other things being equal, which product we should use.
In computer software, quickness of execution is the primary currency that you work in.
You give up speed in order to get more features or benefits, such as more eye-candy, more features, easier to support code, or time spent in development.
At the end of the day, the software that does what you want it to, as easily as you want it to, with the smallest memory footprint and smallest cpu cycles used, should be the one that you pick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386721</id>
	<title>Re:Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1245403740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And you're sure you want to do that? First, it's possibly illegal.</p></div><p>What, letting specific people play music from your collection?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And you 're sure you want to do that ?
First , it 's possibly illegal.What , letting specific people play music from your collection ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you're sure you want to do that?
First, it's possibly illegal.What, letting specific people play music from your collection?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386079</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386739</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1245403920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is unfortunately a natural part of live.</p><p>Open Standards are a great thing, but part of being open by necessity means being created by committee, and generally a committee formed up of the people who are trying to generate their own proprietary solutions.</p><p>HTML standards are, in general, at least 2 years behind where the actual implementation is. People write websites in flash because flash is a relatively good solution to delivering cross platform Rich Internet Applications. HTML 5 looks like it will provide at least some help in generating these things using open standards and Microsoft's new attention to the HTML standards will help as well, but realistically by the time HTML 5 has any kind of real penetration the web will be moving onto the next big thing which HTML 5 won't be able to provide.</p><p>For better or worse, someone will provide the technology to implement what business wants to do with the web because that's the way the market works. The ideas which provide that technology will pretty much guaranteed never be from the W3C or any other open standards body, so the cutting edge of technology will pretty much always be using a standard which is unique to the software implementing it and standards will gradually come in sometimes years later.</p><p>Until someone can come up with a way to make committees efficient and people with diverging commercial interests work for the general good, this is probably just going to be the nature of life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is unfortunately a natural part of live.Open Standards are a great thing , but part of being open by necessity means being created by committee , and generally a committee formed up of the people who are trying to generate their own proprietary solutions.HTML standards are , in general , at least 2 years behind where the actual implementation is .
People write websites in flash because flash is a relatively good solution to delivering cross platform Rich Internet Applications .
HTML 5 looks like it will provide at least some help in generating these things using open standards and Microsoft 's new attention to the HTML standards will help as well , but realistically by the time HTML 5 has any kind of real penetration the web will be moving onto the next big thing which HTML 5 wo n't be able to provide.For better or worse , someone will provide the technology to implement what business wants to do with the web because that 's the way the market works .
The ideas which provide that technology will pretty much guaranteed never be from the W3C or any other open standards body , so the cutting edge of technology will pretty much always be using a standard which is unique to the software implementing it and standards will gradually come in sometimes years later.Until someone can come up with a way to make committees efficient and people with diverging commercial interests work for the general good , this is probably just going to be the nature of life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is unfortunately a natural part of live.Open Standards are a great thing, but part of being open by necessity means being created by committee, and generally a committee formed up of the people who are trying to generate their own proprietary solutions.HTML standards are, in general, at least 2 years behind where the actual implementation is.
People write websites in flash because flash is a relatively good solution to delivering cross platform Rich Internet Applications.
HTML 5 looks like it will provide at least some help in generating these things using open standards and Microsoft's new attention to the HTML standards will help as well, but realistically by the time HTML 5 has any kind of real penetration the web will be moving onto the next big thing which HTML 5 won't be able to provide.For better or worse, someone will provide the technology to implement what business wants to do with the web because that's the way the market works.
The ideas which provide that technology will pretty much guaranteed never be from the W3C or any other open standards body, so the cutting edge of technology will pretty much always be using a standard which is unique to the software implementing it and standards will gradually come in sometimes years later.Until someone can come up with a way to make committees efficient and people with diverging commercial interests work for the general good, this is probably just going to be the nature of life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385733</id>
	<title>The real speed test...</title>
	<author>bgspence</author>
	<datestamp>1245350340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How long does it take someone unfamiliar with a each web server take to download the required software and serve the first page?</p><p>I bet Opera Unite beats the other solutions by a mile.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How long does it take someone unfamiliar with a each web server take to download the required software and serve the first page ? I bet Opera Unite beats the other solutions by a mile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long does it take someone unfamiliar with a each web server take to download the required software and serve the first page?I bet Opera Unite beats the other solutions by a mile.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391733</id>
	<title>Re:What is this juvenile fascination with speed?</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1245433920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Seriously, these speed evaluations are irrelevant, boring, and inane to<br>the extreme. How about some evaluation of the possible uses this new<br>technology will be put to, and how its abilities to support these uses<br>compares to other competing or similar technologies.</p></div></blockquote><p>Underneath all the marketing speak, its (1) a local webserver, and (2) a central proxying service, giving you some of the benefits of a local webserver, with the drawbacks of an additional dependency on an external server which presents a single point of failure. The only additional advantage it seems to have is that the local webserver actively connects to the remote proxy, which makes Unite useful if you have to tunnel through a firewall you don't control (but where you have enough control of the computer to put Unite on it in the first place).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , these speed evaluations are irrelevant , boring , and inane tothe extreme .
How about some evaluation of the possible uses this newtechnology will be put to , and how its abilities to support these usescompares to other competing or similar technologies.Underneath all the marketing speak , its ( 1 ) a local webserver , and ( 2 ) a central proxying service , giving you some of the benefits of a local webserver , with the drawbacks of an additional dependency on an external server which presents a single point of failure .
The only additional advantage it seems to have is that the local webserver actively connects to the remote proxy , which makes Unite useful if you have to tunnel through a firewall you do n't control ( but where you have enough control of the computer to put Unite on it in the first place ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, these speed evaluations are irrelevant, boring, and inane tothe extreme.
How about some evaluation of the possible uses this newtechnology will be put to, and how its abilities to support these usescompares to other competing or similar technologies.Underneath all the marketing speak, its (1) a local webserver, and (2) a central proxying service, giving you some of the benefits of a local webserver, with the drawbacks of an additional dependency on an external server which presents a single point of failure.
The only additional advantage it seems to have is that the local webserver actively connects to the remote proxy, which makes Unite useful if you have to tunnel through a firewall you don't control (but where you have enough control of the computer to put Unite on it in the first place).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385981</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>Chainsaw</author>
	<datestamp>1245352980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and you're restricted from hosting content that they consider "obscene, vulgar, hateful, threatening, or that violates any laws"</p></div><p>Dude... You're talking about a company residing in Norway. The third largest export after oil and salmon is <a href="http://www.norsksvartmetall.com/top1.htm" title="norsksvartmetall.com">Black Metal</a> [norsksvartmetall.com]. Which is kind of bizarre, as Norwegian is probably one of the most cheerful languages there is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and you 're restricted from hosting content that they consider " obscene , vulgar , hateful , threatening , or that violates any laws " Dude... You 're talking about a company residing in Norway .
The third largest export after oil and salmon is Black Metal [ norsksvartmetall.com ] .
Which is kind of bizarre , as Norwegian is probably one of the most cheerful languages there is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and you're restricted from hosting content that they consider "obscene, vulgar, hateful, threatening, or that violates any laws"Dude... You're talking about a company residing in Norway.
The third largest export after oil and salmon is Black Metal [norsksvartmetall.com].
Which is kind of bizarre, as Norwegian is probably one of the most cheerful languages there is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384869</id>
	<title>all i need now</title>
	<author>markringen</author>
	<datestamp>1245340980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>all i need now is a dumb server: by that i mean a os that only has 1 single task (webhost).
and be truly modular, i don't want several hundred background tasks running all over the place.

without rewriting linux/bsd/etc your pretty much screwed, in achieving a clean "security hole free" webserver.</htmltext>
<tokenext>all i need now is a dumb server : by that i mean a os that only has 1 single task ( webhost ) .
and be truly modular , i do n't want several hundred background tasks running all over the place .
without rewriting linux/bsd/etc your pretty much screwed , in achieving a clean " security hole free " webserver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all i need now is a dumb server: by that i mean a os that only has 1 single task (webhost).
and be truly modular, i don't want several hundred background tasks running all over the place.
without rewriting linux/bsd/etc your pretty much screwed, in achieving a clean "security hole free" webserver.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384901</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>NervousNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1245341220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's hope yet, we still have Lynx.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's hope yet , we still have Lynx .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's hope yet, we still have Lynx.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387587</id>
	<title>Re:Disturbing trend</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1245414000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On OS X, you just need to click the Enable Web Sharing checkbox in Sharing in System Preferences.  I think there is something similar with Windows.  The big problem at the moment is NAT traversal.  You either need connections forwarded from a third party, or you need to set up port forwarding.  When we have IPv6 deployed on consumer-grade connections, this problem goes away; just advertise the IPv6 address and let people connect to it directly.  </p><p>
For this kind of use, however, something like FreeNet would be better than standard HTTP.  The nice thing about third-party providers is that the server keeps working when the client machine is disconnected.  I don't need to keep my laptop online for people to see the photos on my web server.  With something like FreeNet, you can host the content but you get distributed caching too.  You don't need all of the anonymity that FreeNet gives, but something built on similar lines would be nice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On OS X , you just need to click the Enable Web Sharing checkbox in Sharing in System Preferences .
I think there is something similar with Windows .
The big problem at the moment is NAT traversal .
You either need connections forwarded from a third party , or you need to set up port forwarding .
When we have IPv6 deployed on consumer-grade connections , this problem goes away ; just advertise the IPv6 address and let people connect to it directly .
For this kind of use , however , something like FreeNet would be better than standard HTTP .
The nice thing about third-party providers is that the server keeps working when the client machine is disconnected .
I do n't need to keep my laptop online for people to see the photos on my web server .
With something like FreeNet , you can host the content but you get distributed caching too .
You do n't need all of the anonymity that FreeNet gives , but something built on similar lines would be nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On OS X, you just need to click the Enable Web Sharing checkbox in Sharing in System Preferences.
I think there is something similar with Windows.
The big problem at the moment is NAT traversal.
You either need connections forwarded from a third party, or you need to set up port forwarding.
When we have IPv6 deployed on consumer-grade connections, this problem goes away; just advertise the IPv6 address and let people connect to it directly.
For this kind of use, however, something like FreeNet would be better than standard HTTP.
The nice thing about third-party providers is that the server keeps working when the client machine is disconnected.
I don't need to keep my laptop online for people to see the photos on my web server.
With something like FreeNet, you can host the content but you get distributed caching too.
You don't need all of the anonymity that FreeNet gives, but something built on similar lines would be nice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385475</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391989</id>
	<title>Re:Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245435060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Epic Fail</p></div><p>STFU!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Epic FailSTFU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Epic FailSTFU!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385247</id>
	<title>Re:So Opera web browser now runs as a system servi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1245345540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, with all this extra stuff, it still runs faster and smoother than any previous version of their browser, there is absolutely no feeling of 'bloat'... and when you turn something off, it stays that way, Turbo, Unite, Mail, Widgets, Dragonfly, etc...</p><p>v10 alpha was already faster than v9.64, and almost every new snapshot has been quicker/better than the previous.</p><p>It's memory footprint isn't really better, but isn't worse than most others... mine's been running for about 4 days since the last time I closed/re-opened it<br>Current: 161MB<br>Peak: 398MB<br>VM: 205MB<br>Handles: 708<br>Threads: 26</p><p>But I don't care about that, from a cold start it launches in under a second, whereas Safari and Chrome take about 4, IE and FF 3.5 take about 9, I've ran into 0 problems with webpages with Opera v10, but FF 3.5 (just as Beta as Opera) won't even allow Slashdot to work half the time, however it is a bit faster on some sites, like Facebook... Plus, Opera hides in the systray, and stays completely idle until i need it, or it shows me a new RSS, or email... making it show up instantly when asked, which is more important (to me) than any memory footprint.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , with all this extra stuff , it still runs faster and smoother than any previous version of their browser , there is absolutely no feeling of 'bloat'... and when you turn something off , it stays that way , Turbo , Unite , Mail , Widgets , Dragonfly , etc...v10 alpha was already faster than v9.64 , and almost every new snapshot has been quicker/better than the previous.It 's memory footprint is n't really better , but is n't worse than most others... mine 's been running for about 4 days since the last time I closed/re-opened itCurrent : 161MBPeak : 398MBVM : 205MBHandles : 708Threads : 26But I do n't care about that , from a cold start it launches in under a second , whereas Safari and Chrome take about 4 , IE and FF 3.5 take about 9 , I 've ran into 0 problems with webpages with Opera v10 , but FF 3.5 ( just as Beta as Opera ) wo n't even allow Slashdot to work half the time , however it is a bit faster on some sites , like Facebook... Plus , Opera hides in the systray , and stays completely idle until i need it , or it shows me a new RSS , or email... making it show up instantly when asked , which is more important ( to me ) than any memory footprint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, with all this extra stuff, it still runs faster and smoother than any previous version of their browser, there is absolutely no feeling of 'bloat'... and when you turn something off, it stays that way, Turbo, Unite, Mail, Widgets, Dragonfly, etc...v10 alpha was already faster than v9.64, and almost every new snapshot has been quicker/better than the previous.It's memory footprint isn't really better, but isn't worse than most others... mine's been running for about 4 days since the last time I closed/re-opened itCurrent: 161MBPeak: 398MBVM: 205MBHandles: 708Threads: 26But I don't care about that, from a cold start it launches in under a second, whereas Safari and Chrome take about 4, IE and FF 3.5 take about 9, I've ran into 0 problems with webpages with Opera v10, but FF 3.5 (just as Beta as Opera) won't even allow Slashdot to work half the time, however it is a bit faster on some sites, like Facebook... Plus, Opera hides in the systray, and stays completely idle until i need it, or it shows me a new RSS, or email... making it show up instantly when asked, which is more important (to me) than any memory footprint.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387009</id>
	<title>Re:Still an Epic Fail</title>
	<author>St.Creed</author>
	<datestamp>1245407220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And I wonder how the RIAA will detect music-sharing on your private friendsbased network. Even if you have 1000+ friends, there's not much chance the RIAA is part of it. They just don't have friends.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I wonder how the RIAA will detect music-sharing on your private friendsbased network .
Even if you have 1000 + friends , there 's not much chance the RIAA is part of it .
They just do n't have friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I wonder how the RIAA will detect music-sharing on your private friendsbased network.
Even if you have 1000+ friends, there's not much chance the RIAA is part of it.
They just don't have friends.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385449</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28395353</id>
	<title>Re:The real speed test...</title>
	<author>aj50</author>
	<datestamp>1245404280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>sudo apt-get install apache2</tt>

<p>About 3 minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sudo apt-get install apache2 About 3 minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sudo apt-get install apache2

About 3 minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385733</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384961</id>
	<title>Stupid benchmark</title>
	<author>royallthefourth</author>
	<datestamp>1245341640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary conflated a web server with a database and a programming language (PHP+Apache+MySQL) when discussing benchmarking of <b>just a web server.</b> </p><p>I'll go ahead and assume that the article isn't worth reading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary conflated a web server with a database and a programming language ( PHP + Apache + MySQL ) when discussing benchmarking of just a web server .
I 'll go ahead and assume that the article is n't worth reading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary conflated a web server with a database and a programming language (PHP+Apache+MySQL) when discussing benchmarking of just a web server.
I'll go ahead and assume that the article isn't worth reading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384779</id>
	<title>It's a toy...</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1245340320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is it a threat to other server solutions?</p></div><p>In one word, No.</p><p>In more words, can it run apps written in PHP, Ruby, Python, Java, etc. with SQL server database back ends? No.</p><p>Can it be load-balanced, clustered, etc. on servers in a data center? Well, maybe if you tried hard enough. Heck, you do anything if you try hard enough. But in one word, No.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it a threat to other server solutions ? In one word , No.In more words , can it run apps written in PHP , Ruby , Python , Java , etc .
with SQL server database back ends ?
No.Can it be load-balanced , clustered , etc .
on servers in a data center ?
Well , maybe if you tried hard enough .
Heck , you do anything if you try hard enough .
But in one word , No .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it a threat to other server solutions?In one word, No.In more words, can it run apps written in PHP, Ruby, Python, Java, etc.
with SQL server database back ends?
No.Can it be load-balanced, clustered, etc.
on servers in a data center?
Well, maybe if you tried hard enough.
Heck, you do anything if you try hard enough.
But in one word, No.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035</id>
	<title>I feel vindicated to some extent</title>
	<author>bogaboga</author>
	<datestamp>1245342600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...He concludes that Opera Unite's server is impressive, and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use...</p></div><p>When I suggested that Apache needed some thing near to easy configuration, I was labeled a troll and requested not to tinker with such a server if I did not know what I was doing. By the way, I know Apache has some configuration GUIs but none comes close to Opera's offer.</p><p>In fact, I was castigated for being one of those who crave "point and click" interfaces that are "responsible" for most of the chaos on the internet.</p><p>I am happy that I have one fellow who agrees with me. I will not be surprised if Opera's web server snatches market share from the established ones.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...He concludes that Opera Unite 's server is impressive , and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use...When I suggested that Apache needed some thing near to easy configuration , I was labeled a troll and requested not to tinker with such a server if I did not know what I was doing .
By the way , I know Apache has some configuration GUIs but none comes close to Opera 's offer.In fact , I was castigated for being one of those who crave " point and click " interfaces that are " responsible " for most of the chaos on the internet.I am happy that I have one fellow who agrees with me .
I will not be surprised if Opera 's web server snatches market share from the established ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...He concludes that Opera Unite's server is impressive, and that the others come nowhere close to the ease of use...When I suggested that Apache needed some thing near to easy configuration, I was labeled a troll and requested not to tinker with such a server if I did not know what I was doing.
By the way, I know Apache has some configuration GUIs but none comes close to Opera's offer.In fact, I was castigated for being one of those who crave "point and click" interfaces that are "responsible" for most of the chaos on the internet.I am happy that I have one fellow who agrees with me.
I will not be surprised if Opera's web server snatches market share from the established ones.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386999</id>
	<title>Re:I feel vindicated to some extent</title>
	<author>St.Creed</author>
	<datestamp>1245407100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A good GUI supported with wizards that can (if desired) access any option available to the commandline is semantically completely equivalent to the commandline function, only easier to use.

Not supplying such a GUI is just stupid, especially if the competition has them and people like them. It's one of the reasons I use Microsoft's webserver, and not Apache - i just want to dump some HTML on the web, not spend hours digging through arcane config files.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A good GUI supported with wizards that can ( if desired ) access any option available to the commandline is semantically completely equivalent to the commandline function , only easier to use .
Not supplying such a GUI is just stupid , especially if the competition has them and people like them .
It 's one of the reasons I use Microsoft 's webserver , and not Apache - i just want to dump some HTML on the web , not spend hours digging through arcane config files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A good GUI supported with wizards that can (if desired) access any option available to the commandline is semantically completely equivalent to the commandline function, only easier to use.
Not supplying such a GUI is just stupid, especially if the competition has them and people like them.
It's one of the reasons I use Microsoft's webserver, and not Apache - i just want to dump some HTML on the web, not spend hours digging through arcane config files.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386857
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385513
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28400899
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385033
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384945
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386999
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387587
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385475
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386079
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384779
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387253
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386839
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385561
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386265
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386461
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386363
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384901
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28396455
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386989
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28395353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385733
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386739
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385449
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28401059
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386173
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390111
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387711
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384961
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28400893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385355
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_19_0227249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386063
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390895
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387523
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384961
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387711
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384847
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384945
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385449
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386079
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386721
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387009
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391989
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387253
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391949
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384859
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386839
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386063
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385513
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390011
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385355
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386989
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386095
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28391733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387123
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384909
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385681
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385247
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385613
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385793
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385561
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385177
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385885
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28400893
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386367
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384901
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386363
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386265
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28396455
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386857
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384753
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385033
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28400899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386739
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385189
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385017
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385475
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387587
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386461
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385981
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28390111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28385733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28395353
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387729
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28401059
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28384779
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28387723
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_19_0227249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_19_0227249.28386131
</commentlist>
</conversation>
